[Pkg-fonts-devel] ttf-paratype-sans repository created on git.debian.org

[Rogério Brito]

Hi, Nicholas.

On Jun 15 2010, Nicolas Spalinger wrote:
> Rogério Brito wrote:
> > 	http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-fonts/ttf-paratype-sans.git
> 
> Thanks both to Dmitry and you for all the efforts in getting this font
> family packaged!

Thanks for the review. It is very much appreciated.

> Some comments at a quick glance:
> 
> - your copyright notice as a packager shouldn't be added right after
> that of the upstream but in a separate section.  This is causing
> confusion.

Agreed.

> Ideally we should move to DEP5-type representation but that's a
> long-term goal.

I guess that I will use the DEP5-style of copyright. It is not as
packaging a font is something that difficult (well, at least for simple
fonts that don't provide bitmapped versions of the typeface and some
other weird stuff).

> - the name of the target folder in the install files should correspond
> to the name of the package: usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-foo instead of
> usr/share/fonts/truetype/foo. A consistency thing with existing
> packaging.

Well, I have some points here:

* the package was initially packaged that way, but I renamed from that
  in commit c5c030:
  http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-fonts/ttf-paratype-sans.git;a=blobdiff;f=debian/install;h=740744f;hp=27d9e0;hb=c5c030;hpb=7ac35d

* while I thought that the prefix of the package names are a good thing
  some time in the past, I now think that it is only an artificial
  implementation detail and, as such, it should only be used when
  strictly necessary.

  In part the duplication of the package name inside the directory
  /usr/share/fonts/$type/$type-$fondry-$name, with the type of the font
  being specified twice is not good.

  I would like to propose a change here so that we don't have a name like:

      /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-paratype-sans

  but, instead, something like:

      /usr/share/fonts/truetype/paratype-sans

  The fonts are already sorted out in subdirectories to avoid collision
  in the case a given font is supplied, say, in Type 1, TrueType and
  OpenType.

> We can refine that when we do a big rename.

Well, I would like to actually sit down and write at least a draft of a
policy for packaging fonts to get things straight. This would, as a
healthy side-effect, make us discuss things to get some points refined.

And, if we could agree on a set of (fontforge) scripts for font
manipulation, like those prepared by Gürkan and maintain them in the
repository (so that they get improved), it would be very nice.

I can donate the scripts that I use and I would also love to learn more
about better ways to manipulate my fonts.

I happen to prefer to code them in python for a number of reasons.

> - I recommend you add the team as maintainer and yourself and others you
> think can help as uploaders.

Sure, much better.

I hope that this e-mail doesn't sound rude, as this is *not* my
intention.  I only want to express some opinions, but my English is far
from flexible.


Thank you very much for the review,

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8
http://rb.doesntexist.org : Packages for LaTeX : algorithms.berlios.de
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br